• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

Cambridge admissions

S

SpremenitiSvet

Cyburbian
Messages
26
Points
2
Did anyone apply to Cambridge's MPhil Planning, Growth & Regeneration degree for this year? Have you heard of your acceptance/rejection as of yet? What made you choose this program?
 
Update

I got admitted recently and am now debating between the following:

1) Go to Cornell and be heavily involved in the Int'l coursework.
or
2) Go to Cambridge and get the in situ international experience.

Both will cost me virtually the same exact price (after fellowships), Cornell is a two-year degree; Cambridge is a 10-month degree.

I already have a Bachelors Degree from an accredited university in Planning.

I plan on continuing onto either a PhD program or a JD program.

What would you do?
 
Huh??

If you have a chance to go to Cambridge.....WHAT IS YOUR problem???

Go to Cambridge:not:

You can always go to Cornell for the PhD;)
 
You should check out the UK Student Room site. The MPhil Planning, Growth, and Regeneration is only a 10 month long course, and it's not really a comprehensive course, i.e. it completely ignores physical planning, among other important aspects. It's in the Land Economy department, which is often considered Cambridge's weak link. Furthermore, and probably most important, the degree is not even accredited by the Royal Town Planning Institute, because the program has severe deficiencies.

In the end, it really depends on what aspects of planning interest you. If you're really interested in economics, this would be a great degree. If you're interested in spatial planning, this would be an absolutely terrible choice.

With all of that said, I would choose Cambridge, hands down. A PhD is a time commitment and a half, so if you can cut the duration of your postgraduate coursework in half, that's certainly a plus!

I might also suggest London School of Economics for their PhD program in Planning.
 
Statistics

To be fair, The University of Cambridge is provisionally accredited by the RTPI (http://www.rtpi.org.uk/item/2561/23/5/3) and the program is also ranked highest amongst all British universities in terms of Town & Country Planning Programmes (http://www.guardian.co.uk/education...-guide-building-and-town-and-country-planning).

That being said, I wonder how much weight that would have in the American field for admission into PhD's later down the road... I just don't want my British degree to be virtually worthless in the American field.

Do you think that it will have an adverse effect on my application for Doctoral programs in the future?
 
I think you should check out the UK Student Rooms. Most students from the UK choose UCL, LSE, or other programs over the Cambridge course. As to why, I'm not exactly sure. I think 10 months is really pushing it in terms of mastering a subject, especially when you consider a couple of those months are dedicated solely to the dissertation, but that's just me. In the end, it's a degree from Cambridge, so you can skate by on the name itself. With that said, it is without question considered the weakness of the University, and that's unquestionable. You can find many opinions of this on the Cambridge boards and the UK Student Rooms. It's the easiest program to gain admission to, as it isn't immensely popular and most students choose to go elsewhere, like the Unis mentioned up post, as well as Reading, Manchester, etc. I would always recommend never choosing a degree simply for the brand name of the University. In this particular case, there are far better programs out there, but it really depends on what suits your needs.

As to your concerns about it having an adverse effect on getting into PhD programs, most definitely not. It's an MPhil from Cambridge, man! As I said earlier, considering the fact that you plan on going forward, I think in this particular instance, I would choose Cambridge simply for the duration of the program and the fact that it is a strong program, even if not the strongest. You'll get everything you need to get out of it to prepare you for doctorate studies, and from what I've heard of the course, you'll do TONS of reading and writing, more so than you would normally expect from most programs. This is to be expected from Oxbridge, though, which is why their reputation is so sterling. So, I would actually say that while an MSc Spatial Planning from UCL would be more practical if you were looking to go into the field upon graduation, the MPhil Planning, Growth, & Regeneration is more practical if you wish to continue onto PhD studies.
 
I might add, if you would like to live in the UK, this is the best way to do so. The UK currently has a section of their Tier 4 visa set up for post-study. As it stands, once you graduate you apply for the post-study visa, and you're given 2 years to live in the UK and look for work. Once you obtain employment you switch over from the post-graduate study visa to another visa, the type of which would depend on your particular employment situation. How long this will last is anyone's guess, though, because the newly formed Tory government is hellbent on curbing immigration loopholes, including this particular visa type.
 
Snicker.....

I can't believe you are still debating this question......:not:

G O T O C A M B R I D G E

;)

US Schools would LOVE to have a Cambridge graduate in their PhD program:p
 
Lux Lisbon said:
... With that said, it is without question considered the weakness of the University, and that's unquestionable. You can find many opinions of this on the Cambridge boards and the UK Student Rooms. It's the easiest program to gain admission to, as it isn't immensely popular and most students choose to go elsewhere...
Click to expand...

Thanks again for the response! I'm just wondering where you are getting your data from because I keep seeing the numbers disagree with you. According to the Cambridge University Reporter it is one of the most competitive programs in terms of acceptance; Land Economy accepted only 2% of applicants in 2009 ( http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2009-10/special/15/table4_1.pdf ). I am new to the British university system and I just want to make sure that I am making an informed decision.

Thank you for the insight to the Tier 4 visa, it is exciting to know that there is a possibility to remain in the country for some time after my graduation.

In regards to students choosing UCL or LSE over Cambridge, I wonder why that would be (once again speaking only from the evidence of statistical data I have garnered, and from noting that Harvard/MIT faculty teach courses at Cambridge). I question this because I was also accepted into LSE's 12-month program.

Thank you all for your responses, it is helping me collect my thoughts!
 
Mphil Planning, growth & regeneration

I’ve just completed my undergraduate planning degree at the Bartlett, UCL and will be reading the Mphil in Planning, Growth & Regeneration this October.
I agree with Lux Lisbon in saying that the UCL Msc courses are more orientated towards professional practice whereas the Cambridge Mphil is more policy focussed. This should be a factor when considering the path you would like to take after graduation. I thoroughly enjoyed my undergraduate degree at UCL and would especially recommend studying there if you have not studied planning before as you will be in close proximity to a range of diverse environments facing a multitude of different issues. Although I did very well on the urban design component of my course I have become more interested in urban politics and policy planning and so have decided to pursue a more theoretically based qualification.

I have read the threads on Student Rooms with regards to the reputation of the land economy department within University of Cambridge as a whole and believe these comments shouldn’t be taken into consideration when deciding where to study for your planning degree because according to the research assessment exercise 2008 the Land Economy Department produced more “world-leading” research than another UK institution (http://www.rae.ac.uk/results/qualityProfile.aspx?id=31&type=uoa). This achievement should not be vilified by students from other departments and does not in my mind constitute a weak link rather a solid contribution to the University’s world class reputation for quality research.

I may also be able to shed some light to the reasons why Lux Lisbon suggests that most UK students choose UCL or the LSE over Cambridge. This could be due to the higher entry requirements by Cambridge (for me 2.1 with 65% in the third year) compared to UCL’s condition of a 2.2. Or perhaps again the combination of a good reputation with location in a larger diverse city may appear more attractive than a smaller one.
 
Land economy applicant

I've just applied to land economy and now I am really freaking out that if I get in I'll be "looked down on" by other cambridge students as they obviously have negative opinions about the validity of the course. Are Land economy students seen as weird?
I thought it would be a great course as it is so relevant to economic issues today, and i aspire to working in the foreign sector. But do employers not value the course?
Atm I'm at the stockholm school of economics and wonder if it just better I stay in sweden... but Cambridge is really a once in a life time opportunity.
 
Back
Top